Now you are pretending to be dumb, aren't you?
Being able to properly defend yourself so an aggressor will not risk attacking in the first place will prevent a war.
Showing how helpless you are and asking an aggressor nicely to respect that and not invade you will not.
It actually is that easy.
Correct. They have ruled that Germany is not taking part in it. Because 91% of the deliveries to Israel for years consist of ships, anti-air and torpedos for their submarines (while the remaining stuff is armor, armored glass, protective gear -funny how helmets are a joke when delivered to Ukraine but a weapon to genocide Palestinians when they are going to Israel, isn't it?- etc and in fact all "weapons" that are potentially to be used in Gaza were in fact reduced to zero.
Yet the narrative is important and so you will always return to "Germany being a big supplier for Israel", constantly ignoring that we know what they actually supplied. And will twist my words as somehow being an argument against a genocide happening, when I did explicitly talk about the fact that Germany is supporting that genocide.
If you are so keen on "factual reasons" please tell me were my facts are wrong or how Israel is dropping corvettes on Gaza. (Yes that phrasing is polemic to make a point. You are free to do the same, if you actually have a point beyond I don't want to acknowledge what doesn't fit my narrative.
Cluster munitions and anti-personel mines are effective AF, seeing how the Ukrainian-Russian war is progressing.
Nope. Anti-vehicle mines are effective. Anti personal mines are of little use in comparison, unless actual infantry marching of foot return.
And cluster ammunition are effective in Ukraine for the simple reason that this is the best stuff they actually got, as the US is dumping their remaining old M30 stocks on them. The few remaining ones not already converted to M31 unitary warheads. While tungsten-shrapnel-based M31A1 and A2 have replaced them in their anti-infantry and anti-light-armor role because they are cheaper, safer and more efficient...
Your argument makes as much sense as advocating that NATO countries should go back to 50+ year old vehicles because they were effective in Ukraine when those were the best they got delivered.
Insulting police officers fascists ✅
Occupation of a public building ✅
Obstruction of an arrest ✅
“From the river to the sea"-chants, outlawed as the call for the destruction of Israel they are ✅
Why are those evil Germans deporting toally innocent people for the thought crime of being pro-Palestina (that they can't stop breaking the law or criticising Israel without calling for a genocide themselves is totally irrelevant, you know...)? And how can they dare to violate their constitutional rights to free expression (that totally doesn't stop when you need to break actual law to express yourself. *cough*)?
🤡
Talking about "landmines" instead of anti-personal mines in the headline is pure sane-washing.
There is no treaty against the use of landmines. There is only one agains the use of anti-personal mines. And for good reasons: When have you seen armies actually marching on foot to make them relevant compared to anti-vehicle landmines the last time? Countries agreed on banning anti-presonal mines because there are very little benefits of using them, yet massiv drawbacks in the form of (often your own) population getting killed for years and decades to come from leftover mines.
PS: The same is true for cluster ammunitions btw. They were not banned because you want to be nice to your enemies but because they are unreliable and duds will kill your civilians still when the war is mostly forgotten. Also there are better (as in cheaper, safer and more effective) shrapnel-based alternatives nowadays. Unbanning those is similarly insane and basically a statement of "fuck my population, I want to use those old stocks I still have, because that's slightly cheaper then building/ordering newer ones".
Democrats are a rediculous clownshow on so many levels...
Yet a "Democrats didn't believe that bombs send to Israel as a deterrence for their very real hostile neighbours are used against civilians instead"-headline would be more truthful.
But hey. This way it's more "haha, democrats are comically insane". And as we all know by now the entertainment value is all that matters and that pesky truth should fuck off.
No, there isn't a contradiction in the argument. There is one in reality: There is no independent authority (police force/judical system) making countries accountable for breaking the law. We tried to build up something comparable on the judical side of things but those still lack the ability to enforce their rulings.
So it boils down to "fortifying your door" and being able to defend it against the few people really determined to tear it down.
Is international law propaganda now?
No international law is international law.
The international court is interpreting international law.
Crying about Germany's support of a genocide while the International Court of Justice (and thus international law) disagrees -and lists factual reasons for their decision- however is either desinformation or a lie.
Help me out here... What do you call desinformation/lies spread to further your agenda again?
Then take a closer look at all the changes to election systems, constant violations of their own laws, corruption and the massive amount of state propaganda they needed to establish over the years to keep staying in power.
What does prevent your stuff from getting stolen all the time? Your ability to lock your door and a state-operated police and judical system that oversees the adherence to laws or the sign over your open door that everyone can come in an take your stuff unpunished?
What does prevent an agressive neighbour with no regards to laws from invading you? The ability to defend yourself making an attempt too costly or your active work on being as helpless as possible and appeasing the aggressor?
Yeah keep eating up the propaganda of how air defense, submarines and ships -that carry the aforementioned air-defense- (about 90%+ of all military deliveries to Israel) are used to genocide Palestinians and is totally not defense against actual hostile neighbours.
PS Also actual stuff classified as "weapons" in those military deliveries of the last years consist (after striking of training ammunition and some explosives for testing purposes in military development) one single order. One. That was for anti-tank weapons (source: the International Court of Justice, as cited for example here.)
Yes, I know... actual details are always bad for keeping some ideological black and white view of reality. But you can in fact criticise the pseudo fascist fanatics in the Israelian government and their genocidal idiocy and not support their action in Gaza while at the same time acknowledging that this does not take away from the fact that Israel has a right to exist and to defend itself against the very real threats in their neighbourhood.
"Fascism is when someone argues with actual facts that don't support my narrative."